Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Little Mikey on healthcare for the elderly:
“If you show up with cancer & you’re 95 years old, we should say...there’s no cure, we can’t do anything."
He will never be elected POTUS.
You’re just as obsessed as your dear leader... cant you be a bit original and try to at least obsess at different times than impotus?
Smorbun wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
What the heck are you talking about??? Me starting a thread about a "chinese split" racist? I am married to a Chinese lady! Chinese splits are what lateral/middle splits used to be called. I was performing a middle/lateral/chinese split. Are you really calling me racist for calling something a "chinese split???"
Racism is not just about hate. It is about feeling superior based on your race. You can be married to a "Chinese lady" and still be racist, even racist against Chinese people. Not saying you are, but you being married to a "Chinese lady" doesn't mean you aren't racist. Also, I didn't call you racist, I just brought up a couple of things off the top of my head where others called you that. You have an inordinate number of people calling you racist. You should spend some time thinking about why that is.
He’s like trigged - just because trump was in a picture with black people it means it’s impossible for him to be racist. Tzee logic.
Trollminator wrote:
Smorbun wrote:
Racism is not just about hate. It is about feeling superior based on your race. You can be married to a "Chinese lady" and still be racist, even racist against Chinese people. Not saying you are, but you being married to a "Chinese lady" doesn't mean you aren't racist. Also, I didn't call you racist, I just brought up a couple of things off the top of my head where others called you that. You have an inordinate number of people calling you racist. You should spend some time thinking about why that is.
He’s like trigged - just because trump was in a picture with black people it means it’s impossible for him to be racist. Tzee logic.
Yep. Both stupid.
Australian left- and right-wing legislators in London to demand return home of Julian Assange.
One thing trump has been good for, uniting people against his administration.
Trollminator wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Little Mikey on healthcare for the elderly:
“If you show up with cancer & you’re 95 years old, we should say...there’s no cure, we can’t do anything."
He will never be elected POTUS.
You’re just as obsessed as your dear leader... cant you be a bit original and try to at least obsess at different times than impotus?
Short-sighted people (pun intended) can’t see that Bloomberg is Trump-lite.
jesseriley wrote:
Australian left- and right-wing legislators in London to demand return home of Julian Assange.
One thing trump has been good for, uniting people against his administration.
There is some unity of perception, yes, but not anything like the level of organization required to fight this regime. Americans are not remotely scared enough. Yesterday a wishy-washy liberal friend told me "the Republicans will eventually realize they can't control Trump". I laughed in his face and told him that those Republicans he speaks of don't care that they can't control Trump. Only one of their Senators even slightly stood up to him--it's not because they are cowards. It is because they want what Trump wants. They do not want a functioning democracy. They never have. Meanwhile, the Democrats are not remotely scared enough. They are concerned, but they are like the man who thinks he has indigestion five minutes before he goes into cardiac arrest. Cardiac arrest is on the horizon sure enough, and that's when we will see if there is the sort of unity that will stop this slow-motion Coup d'etat. The Democrat primary will be a disaster of Wall Street liberals trying to install their puppet. That puppet will then go up against Herr Trump in an election that very likely will be a catastrophe.
Yosinglerzz wrote:
Short-sighted people (pun intended) can’t see that Bloomberg is Trump-lite.
Bloomberg falls into the category of any functioning adult so no there's no equivalence with him either, but keep searching.
Yosinglerzz wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
You’re just as obsessed as your dear leader... cant you be a bit original and try to at least obsess at different times than impotus?
Short-sighted people (pun intended) can’t see that Bloomberg is Trump-lite.
I don't understand this view. Could someone help me understand it?
Esterhazy wrote:
jesseriley wrote:
Australian left- and right-wing legislators in London to demand return home of Julian Assange.
One thing trump has been good for, uniting people against his administration.
There is some unity of perception, yes, but not anything like the level of organization required to fight this regime. Americans are not remotely scared enough. Yesterday a wishy-washy liberal friend told me "the Republicans will eventually realize they can't control Trump". I laughed in his face and told him that those Republicans he speaks of don't care that they can't control Trump. Only one of their Senators even slightly stood up to him--it's not because they are cowards. It is because they want what Trump wants. They do not want a functioning democracy. They never have. Meanwhile, the Democrats are not remotely scared enough. They are concerned, but they are like the man who thinks he has indigestion five minutes before he goes into cardiac arrest. Cardiac arrest is on the horizon sure enough, and that's when we will see if there is the sort of unity that will stop this slow-motion Coup d'etat. The Democrat primary will be a disaster of Wall Street liberals trying to install their puppet. That puppet will then go up against Herr Trump in an election that very likely will be a catastrophe.
This election will be a bet on the following groups: the brainwashed tzees, the fearful Dems, and the passive/complacent. Fearful Dems + passive/complacent groups > braiwashed tzees... BUT that requires the passive/complacent to vote.
agip wrote:
Yosinglerzz wrote:
Short-sighted people (pun intended) can’t see that Bloomberg is Trump-lite.
I don't understand this view. Could someone help me understand it?
Sure I’ll be your huckleberry.
Narcissistic, bigoted, misogynistic, old white guy beholden to his rich friends with little regard for the ‘common man’ he claims to represent.
Next.
Trollminator wrote:
Yosinglerzz wrote:
Short-sighted people (pun intended) can’t see that Bloomberg is Trump-lite.
Bloomberg falls into the category of any functioning adult so no there's no equivalence with him either, but keep searching.
You make no sense. After the utter thrashing you received yesterday, please stop responding to me.
Stay in your lane with Sally and Rigged. You are just a horse of a different color.
Yosinglerzz wrote:
agip wrote:
I don't understand this view. Could someone help me understand it?
Sure I’ll be your huckleberry.
Narcissistic, bigoted, misogynistic, old white guy beholden to his rich friends with little regard for the ‘common man’ he claims to represent.
Next.
ok well thanks
holy nihilism, batman.
Huge DOW growth since March 09. Who was president then?
Smorbun wrote:
EconMajorRunner wrote:
The DOW was 18,500 when Trump took office but it was about 17,500 when he won the election. The value of all US stocks at that time was roughly $40 Trillion. The 60%+ increase since then equates to roughly $24 Trillion in added wealth. One could argue it isn't all due to trump's tax policies and trade agreements but there is no disputing they contributed significantly. Important to remember the Dem leaning economists like Krugman predicted complete collapse of the economy if trump were to win. They keep lying. I bet they wish they didn't slam Romney so bad in 2012. If the world made sense, he would be finishing his second term. Trump has been awesome, dems would be complaining no matter which republican had won.
Romney was not slammed anywhere near as bad as Trump has been, and for good reason. No other Republican who has been a serious candidate for President has been as horrible a person, as ignorant, as corrupt, as criminal as Trump. You support a dictator wannabe. I thought you Republicans were all about freedom. Dictators take that away, and he already has to some degree with no more press briefings, etc. If he is elected again, and he might be, the US will be in for some very tough times, and he will try to wield power never before seen from a US President, breaking only his record there.
If he’d forget about his failing vanity wall maybe he could work on solving this.
Promises made, promises broken. His base don’t pay attention.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-released-375-000-illegal-145039255.html
That Trumper also lied about the DOW numbers. The DOW was 19,800 when Drumpf took office NOT 18,500. When he won the election is meaningless. Trumpers might as well claim when Trump was born as the start of their Fourth Reich. Back then the DOW was under 200.
Conundrum wrote:
https://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historical-chartHuge DOW growth since March 09. Who was president then?
EconMajorRunner wrote:
The DOW was 18,500 when Trump took office but it was about 17,500 when he won the election.
So it looks like this will be a three person race coming out of Super Tuesday...Bernie Joe Mike.
Everyone else will have to drop out, most likely. The 15% rule will push out Amy and Eliz and Pete. Although Pete could hang in for a while I suppose.
Bernie has the advantage of a split moderate vote. But Bernie depends on young voters, who don't tend to vote very much.
I wish it were one leftist vs one centrist - that would be a better primary.
But right now, as we speak, it's hard for me to see anyone but bernie being the nominee. Bernie will do better in CA and NY and probably Texas...hard to overcome all that, plus the advantage of a split vote.
Spotter of Trumpers wrote:
That Trumper also lied about the DOW numbers. The DOW was 19,800 when Drumpf took office NOT 18,500. When he won the election is meaningless. Trumpers might as well claim when Trump was born as the start of their Fourth Reich. Back then the DOW was under 200.
Conundrum wrote:
https://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historical-chartHuge DOW growth since March 09. Who was president then?
EconMajorRunner wrote:
The DOW was 18,500 when Trump took office but it was about 17,500 when he won the election.
Sad how some people treat Dem v Pubs like a sports competition.
Yosinglerzy wrote:
Sad how some people treat Dem v Pubs like a sports competition.
Which is what you just did.
Spotter of Trumpers wrote:
Yosinglerzy wrote:
Sad how some people treat Dem v Pubs like a sports competition.
Which is what you just did.
Smh